I'm guessing that Charles doesn't like that two-way JVM/CLR crap because it either means code bases are targeted and wholly incompatible (will you use java.util.List or c#.util.list?) or every library needs to be rewritten as an abstraction that is capable of targeting either library. Such abstractions are sometimes welcome, but often just a pointless indirection and another API to learn.
Incidentally, projectlombok.org's goals are pretty much that: A java.next for the rest of us. Closures, more literals, probably extension methods and operator overloading, properties, lots of boilerplate elimination, et voila. On Aug 12, 12:52 pm, Casper Bang <[email protected]> wrote: > > I like Fan. But to be honest, I wish there wasn't quite so much > > attention paid to API-compatibility across both JVM and CLR worlds. > > You mean as in it's too easy to write code depending on one or the > other? (selective interoperability rather than compatibility) > > > And it's not Scala; it's Scala++--. > > That just means it has the potential to attract the 90% of the current > community who would otherwise choke on Scala. ;) > > /Casper --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
